BS: BDS of Israel 'Gathering Weight.'

Subject: RE: BS: BDS of Israel 'Gathering Weight.'
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 08 Aug 14 - 06:01 PM

Arguable my arse, Islamophobe. You fire a gun and your bullet kills a person, you killed that person. No-one else killed that person. If you find something "arguable" about that, you are insane, and, frankly, not worth talking to. You had a choice as to whether you fired that gun. Hamas rockets have killed about one Israeli, on average, per annum since the turn of the millennium. That is a very bad thing and I wish it hadn't happened. But you cannot argue that killing 1800 civilians in a month was an act of self-defence against that. Had the Israelis been up against a massive onslaught that threatened their very existence, well yes, the retaliation would have been proportionate. But you know as well as I do that that was not the case. Gaza, to the Israelis, contains a wasps' nest that might occasionally make them feel uneasy and might occasionally result in an Israeli or two getting stung. But Israelis still enjoy their affluent lifestyles (often on stolen land, of course), and get to the beach and drink their cocktails of a summer's evening on their porches (good luck to 'em - I like doing all that as well). But they don't just extirpate the wasps' nest. They ravage the whole area, paying little heed to the value of the lives of ordinary Gazans. But, when we give them a little bollocking, they call us antisemitic. Get a grip, Michael. You're losing it, big time, old chap. Very old chap.

Subject: RE: BS: BDS of Israel 'Gathering Weight.'
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 09 Aug 14 - 04:37 AM

More atrocity denying Keith - you have her statement, you have had Dr Ang Swee Chai's statement, you have Chomski's overall veiw (ignored, of course) you have had the masses of evidence by independent observers Human Rights groups and enquiries, yet you're still there with your "Israel is Innocent" placard.
The defence of two atrocities - flechettes and Sabra Shatila - at the same time - must be worth some sort of prize!
The ironic feature of all this is that, for all your posturing, you have no regard whatever for the Jewish people - your concern is solely for the extremist right-wing regime that now governs Israel.
Some time ago we discussed British wartime fascism
It arose from my recalling a story of two British politicians being told of what was happening in Belsen and Auschwitz and responding by describing the reports as "lies invented by whining Yids".
You immediately leapt to the defence of these 'gentlemen' by denying that such a thing could ever have happened.
The argument brought up the existence of a group of British politicians, nobility and businessmen who had formed themselves into an alternative government to take over Britain "when Herr Hitler had won the war"
Prominent in the group was the 5th Duke of Wellington (who was later to die cursing "the Yids" on his deathbed) and Archibald Maule Ramsey, whose 'Red Book' had been recently made public.
Maule's book contained masses of Antisemitic poetry along with plans for what was to happen to British Jewry when Germany won the war, (his dream was recently chillingly depicted in C.J. Sansom's novel, 'Dominion'
You described Maule as "an eccentric" and his diatribes of Antisemitism as "harmless", comparing them to the theme song of 'Dad's Army'
Considering that this was all happening at the same time as six million Jews where being herded into the extermination ovens of Auschwitz and other such facilities, I think that this puts your proclaimed regard for the Jewish People in somewhat of a strange light.
You are an extremist right winger and your ongoing defence of the Israeli regime has more to do with your own political position than it does any concern you might claim for The Jews.
I suspect that, given the constant attempts of those who persist in blaming 'The Jews' for atrocities such as Sabra/Shatila and Deir Yassin by making any criticism of israel 'Antisemitic', you are not alone in your right-wing extremism
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: BDS of Israel 'Gathering Weight.'
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 09 Aug 14 - 04:38 AM

Someone is gunning down your family from behind their own kid.
Take the shot or wait till he runs out of live kids and bullets?
Would it make you a murderer?

Subject: RE: BS: BDS of Israel 'Gathering Weight.'
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 09 Aug 14 - 04:42 AM

I have her statement and can quote it.

As with me you can only misrepresent what was said, but not produce actual quotes, because your accounts are lies.

Subject: RE: BS: BDS of Israel 'Gathering Weight.'
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 09 Aug 14 - 05:55 AM

Steve, You fire a gun and your bullet kills a person, you killed that person. No-one else killed that person

So you are not one of those who blame Israel for what Arab militia did at Sabra Shatila, or US for the hundreds of thousands of killings in post invasion Iraq.

Subject: RE: BS: BDS of Israel 'Gathering Weight.'
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 09 Aug 14 - 05:59 AM

"I have her statement and can quote it."
Do so - but it doesn't make a shit of difference to the overall facts which you choose to ignore
"Take the shot or wait till he runs out of live kids and bullets?"
What on earth are you babbling about - Israel has slaughtered nearly two thousand people indiscriminately claiming that Hamas is hiding somewhere among them
No running out and aiming - just blitzing everything in range
That makes it mass murder
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: BDS of Israel 'Gathering Weight.'
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 09 Aug 14 - 07:09 AM

Jim, you claimed her account backs your version but it does not.
You lied.
My analogy was re. Steve's simplistic assesment.

Whatever you and Steve think, it is legal to fight back against an aggressor who hides behind civilians.

Subject: RE: BS: BDS of Israel 'Gathering Weight.'
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 09 Aug 14 - 08:46 AM

"Whatever you and Steve think, it is legal to fight back against an aggressor who hides behind civilians."
What on earth are you talking about - who was hiding behind whom?
Which atrocity are you defending now"
"Jim, you claimed her account backs your version but it does not.

No did not Keith, though I accept you are far better than anybody else to recognise lies as you have turned them into a fine art.
Ellen Seigal says she witnessed the massacre from the roof of the hospital with the assistance of the flares provided by the Israelis - in her statement
It's in her report - please tell me it is not.
She gave evidence that she saw the Israeli soldier coming to the site during the massacre, being stopped at the gate, turning away and leaving them to it.
It's in her report - please tell me it is not.
She gave evidence of seeing the Israeli bulldozers at work as she wads leaving.
It's in her report - please tell me it is not.
All this is in her statement
Other accounts actually give descriptions of Israeli troops running amok during the massacre - but they came from the victims so they won't count with yo
The Israeli Kahan commission report actually stated that the Israelis knew exactly what was going on while it was going on and did nothing.
Why are you continuing to defend a massacre that has long been done and dusted?
Kahan report
"The decision on the entry of the Phalangists into the refugee camps was taken without consideration of the danger - which the makers and executors of the decision were obligated to foresee as probable - the Phalangists would commit massacres and pogroms against the inhabitants of the camps, and without an examination of the means for preventing this danger.
Similarly, it is clear from the course of events that when the reports began to arrive about the actions of the Phalangists in the camps, no proper heed was taken of these reports, the correct conclusions were not drawn from them, and no energetic and immediate action were taken to restrain the Phalangists and put a stop to their actions."
" Ariel Sharon was held personally responsible for allowing the Phalangists into the camps."
Is there no end to your atrocity condoning?
Jim Carroll

An American account of U.S. Involvement from the N.Y Times:
A Preventable Massacre
By SETH ANZISKA
ON the night of Sept. 16, 1982, the Israeli military allowed a right-wing Lebanese militia to enter two Palestinian refugee camps in Beirut. In the ensuing three-day rampage, the militia, linked to the Maronite Christian Phalange Party, raped, killed and dismembered at least 800 civilians, while Israeli flares illuminated the camps' narrow and darkened alleyways. Nearly all of the dead were women, children and elderly men.
For Op-Ed, follow @nytopinion and to hear from the editorial page editor, Andrew Rosenthal, follow @andyrNYT.
Thirty years later, the massacre at the Sabra and Shatila camps is remembered as a notorious chapter in modern Middle Eastern history, clouding the tortured relationships among Israel, the United States, Lebanon and the Palestinians. In 1983, an Israeli investigative commission concluded that Israeli leaders were "indirectly responsible" for the killings and that Ariel Sharon, then the defense minister and later prime minister, bore "personal responsibility" for failing to prevent them.
While Israel's role in the massacre has been closely examined, America's actions have never been fully understood. This summer, at the Israel State Archives, I found recently declassified documents that chronicle key conversations between American and Israeli officials before and during the 1982 massacre. The verbatim transcripts reveal that the Israelis misled American diplomats about events in Beirut and bullied them into accepting the spurious claim that thousands of "terrorists" were in the camps. Most troubling, when the United States was in a position to exert strong diplomatic pressure on Israel that could have ended the atrocities, it failed to do so. As a result, Phalange militiamen were able to murder Palestinian civilians, whom America had pledged to protect just weeks earlier.
Israel's involvement in the Lebanese civil war began in June 1982, when it invaded its northern neighbor. Its goal was to root out the Palestine Liberation Organization, which had set up a state within a state, and to transform Lebanon into a Christian-ruled ally. The Israel Defense Forces soon besieged P.L.O.-controlled areas in the western part of Beirut. Intense Israeli bombardments led to heavy civilian casualties and tested even President Ronald Reagan, who initially backed Israel. In mid-August, as America was negotiating the P.L.O.'s withdrawal from Lebanon, Reagan told Prime Minister Menachem Begin that the bombings "had to stop or our entire future relationship was endangered," Reagan wrote in his diaries.

The United States agreed to deploy Marines to Lebanon as part of a multinational force to supervise the P.L.O.'s departure, and by Sept. 1, thousands of its fighters — including Yasir Arafat — had left Beirut for various Arab countries. After America negotiated a cease-fire that included written guarantees to protect the Palestinian civilians remaining in the camps from vengeful Lebanese Christians, the Marines departed Beirut, on Sept. 10.
Israel hoped that Lebanon's newly elected president, Bashir Gemayel, a Maronite, would support an Israeli-Christian alliance. But on Sept. 14, Gemayel was assassinated. Israel reacted by violating the cease-fire agreement. It quickly occupied West Beirut — ostensibly to prevent militia attacks against the Palestinian civilians. "The main order of the day is to keep the peace," Begin told the American envoy to the Middle East, Morris Draper, on Sept. 15. "Otherwise, there could be pogroms."
By Sept. 16, the I.D.F. was fully in control of West Beirut, including Sabra and Shatila. In Washington that same day, Under Secretary of State Lawrence S. Eagleburger told the Israeli ambassador, Moshe Arens, that "Israel's credibility has been severely damaged" and that "we appear to some to be the victim of deliberate deception by Israel." He demanded that Israel withdraw from West Beirut immediately.
In Tel Aviv, Mr. Draper and the American ambassador, Samuel W. Lewis, met with top Israeli officials. Contrary to Prime Minister Begin's earlier assurances, Defense Minister Sharon said the occupation of West Beirut was justified because there were "2,000 to 3,000 terrorists who remained there." Mr. Draper disputed this claim; having coordinated the August evacuation, he knew the number was minuscule. Mr. Draper said he was horrified to hear that Mr. Sharon was considering allowing the Phalange militia into West Beirut. Even the I.D.F. chief of staff, Rafael Eitan, acknowledged to the Americans that he feared "a relentless slaughter."
On the evening of Sept. 16, the Israeli cabinet met and was informed that Phalange fighters were entering the Palestinian camps. Deputy Prime Minister David Levy worried aloud: "I know what the meaning of revenge is for them, what kind of slaughter. Then no one will believe we went in to create order there, and we will bear the blame." That evening, word of civilian deaths began to filter out to Israeli military officials, politicians and journalists.

At 12:30 p.m. on Sept. 17, Foreign Minister Yitzhak Shamir hosted a meeting with Mr. Draper, Mr. Sharon and several Israeli intelligence chiefs. Mr. Shamir, having reportedly heard of a "slaughter" in the camps that morning, did not mention it.
The transcript of the Sept. 17 meeting reveals that the Americans were browbeaten by Mr. Sharon's false insistence that "terrorists" needed "mopping up." It also shows how Israel's refusal to relinquish areas under its control, and its delays in coordinating with the Lebanese National Army, which the Americans wanted to step in, prolonged the slaughter.
Mr. Draper opened the meeting by demanding that the I.D.F. pull back right away. Mr. Sharon exploded, "I just don't understand, what are you looking for? Do you want the terrorists to stay? Are you afraid that somebody will think that you were in collusion with us? Deny it. We denied it." Mr. Draper, unmoved, kept pushing for definitive signs of a withdrawal. Mr. Sharon, who knew Phalange forces had already entered the camps, cynically told him, "Nothing will happen. Maybe some more terrorists will be killed. That will be to the benefit of all of us." Mr. Shamir and Mr. Sharon finally agreed to gradually withdraw once the Lebanese Army started entering the city — but they insisted on waiting 48 hours (until the end of Rosh Hashana, which started that evening).
Continuing his plea for some sign of an Israeli withdrawal, Mr. Draper warned that critics would say, "Sure, the I.D.F. is going to stay in West Beirut and they will let the Lebanese go and kill the Palestinians in the camps."
Mr. Sharon replied: "So, we'll kill them. They will not be left there. You are not going to save them. You are not going to save these groups of the international terrorism."

Mr. Draper responded: "We are not interested in saving any of these people." Mr. Sharon declared: "If you don't want the Lebanese to kill them, we will kill them."
Mr. Draper then caught himself, and backtracked. He reminded the Israelis that the United States had painstakingly facilitated the P.L.O. exit from Beirut "so it wouldn't be necessary for you to come in." He added, "You should have stayed out."
Mr. Sharon exploded again: "When it comes to our security, we have never asked. We will never ask. When it comes to existence and security, it is our own responsibility and we will never give it to anybody to decide for us." The meeting ended with an agreement to coordinate withdrawal plans after Rosh Hashana.
By allowing the argument to proceed on Mr. Sharon's terms, Mr. Draper effectively gave Israel cover to let the Phalange fighters remain in the camps. Fuller details of the massacre began to emerge on Sept. 18, when a young American diplomat, Ryan C. Crocker, visited the gruesome scene and reported back to Washington.

Years later, Mr. Draper called the massacre "obscene." And in an oral history recorded a few years before his death in 2005, he remembered telling Mr. Sharon: "You should be ashamed. The situation is absolutely appalling. They're killing children! You have the field completely under your control and are therefore responsible for that area."
On Sept. 18, Reagan pronounced his "outrage and revulsion over the murders." He said the United States had opposed Israel's invasion of Beirut, both because "we believed it wrong in principle and for fear that it would provoke further fighting." Secretary of State George P. Shultz later admitted that "we are partially responsible" because "we took the Israelis and the Lebanese at their word." He summoned Ambassador Arens. "When you take military control over a city, you're responsible for what happens," he told him. "Now we have a massacre."
But the belated expression of shock and dismay belies the Americans' failed diplomatic effort during the massacre. The transcript of Mr. Draper's meeting with the Israelis demonstrates how the United States was unwittingly complicit in the tragedy of Sabra and Shatila.

Ambassador Lewis, now retired, told me that the massacre would have been hard to prevent "unless Reagan had picked up the phone and called Begin and read him the riot act even more clearly than he already did in August — that might have stopped it temporarily." But "Sharon would have found some other way" for the militiamen to take action, Mr. Lewis added.
Nicholas A. Veliotes, then the assistant secretary of state for Near Eastern affairs, agreed. "Vintage Sharon," he said, after I read the transcript to him. "It is his way or the highway."
The Sabra and Shatila massacre severely undercut America's influence in the Middle East, and its moral authority plummeted. In the aftermath of the massacre, the United States felt compelled by "guilt" to redeploy the Marines, who ended up without a clear mission, in the midst of a brutal civil war.
On Oct. 23, 1983, the Marine barracks in Beirut were bombed and 241 Marines were killed. The attack led to open warfare with Syrian-backed forces and, soon after, the rapid withdrawal of the Marines to their ships. As Mr. Lewis told me, America left Lebanon "with our tail between our legs."
The archival record reveals the magnitude of a deception that undermined American efforts to avoid bloodshed. Working with only partial knowledge of the reality on the ground, the United States feebly yielded to false arguments and stalling tactics that allowed a massacre in progress to proceed.
The lesson of the Sabra and Shatila tragedy is clear. Sometimes close allies act contrary to American interests and values. Failing to exert American power to uphold those interests and values can have disastrous consequences: for our allies, for our moral standing and most important, for the innocent people who pay the highest price of all.
Seth Anziska is a doctoral candidate in international history at Columbia University.

Subject: RE: BS: BDS of Israel 'Gathering Weight.'
From: MGM·Lion
Date: 09 Aug 14 - 08:46 AM

@ Steve Shaw

Why are you being so rude, Steve? Good manners are an earnest of an overall decency. Stinking manners, meanwhile, enhance nobody's arguments, however otherwise convincing...

...As I trust you may learn as you mature --


All best regards, as ever,

from the preternaturally ancient

≈Michael≈

Subject: RE: BS: BDS of Israel 'Gathering Weight.'
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 09 Aug 14 - 08:55 AM

Ellen Seigal says she witnessed the massacre from the roof of the hospital with the assistance of the flares provided by the Israelis - in her statement
It's in her report - please tell me it is not.

It is not.
She knew nothing of any massacre until she went out in the aftermath.

She saw no Israeli soldier until she had left the camp.

She did not say the bulldozer was burying bodies.

All your made up shit Jim.

Subject: RE: BS: BDS of Israel 'Gathering Weight.'
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 09 Aug 14 - 11:26 AM

So you are not one of those who blame Israel for what Arab militia did at Sabra Shatila, or US for the hundreds of thousands of killings in post invasion Iraq.

You may not have noticed that I am not "blaming". I am stating a very plain fact that many people, including you, want to deny. That if you fire a weapon, and it kills someone, it is you who did the killing. I've been very consistent in saying that and it has nothing to do with blame. You had a choice as to whether you fired that weapon. Blaming is a separate issue. Perhaps you fired because your family would otherwise have been immediately murdered (which actually happened to a number of families in Gaza, in case you hadn't noticed) if you hadn't. No-one would blame you for doing that. But there have been no such circumstances facing Israelis in this conflict. Every shell, bullet or bomb sent by the IDF that killed innocent civilians in Gaza was deliberately fired by an Israeli person who fired blind with little or no regard for the consequences. Yes that's what Hamas does as well. That is a bad thing. You will agree with that. But you are utterly blind as to the out-of-control disproportionality of Israel's response. Firing shells blind into a heavily-populated civilian area in no better than firing rockets into towns in Israel. That is because you are a racist Islamophobe. By the way, no-one has gunned down any Israeli family from behind their own kids. Yet you accuse people here of making stuff up all the time.

Subject: RE: BS: BDS of Israel 'Gathering Weight.'
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 09 Aug 14 - 11:29 AM

And I inserted a sentence in the wrong bloody place.

Subject: RE: BS: BDS of Israel 'Gathering Weight.'
From: GUEST,jts
Date: 09 Aug 14 - 12:25 PM

Mr. Shaw, I am not so sure that every Israeli shell and rocket was "fired blind" I think that many targets were chosen for their propaganda and terror value, including hospitals and the UN school. Otherwise I heartily agree with your post.

Subject: RE: BS: BDS of Israel 'Gathering Weight.'
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 09 Aug 14 - 12:54 PM

Well we might never get to find out. Any weaponry which targets civilian areas is fired without regard for civilians, no matter what excuses are given. Both sides do that. The justification given by Hamas is that they are under siege, which is undeniable and intolerable. The justification given by Israel is that they are protecting their civilians. I think they are actually visiting on their civilians far greater insecurity and cause for fear for many years to come. Unfortunately, so far the Israeli regime has managed to hoodwink most of the civilian population. The world outside Israel is a different proposition, though I'm certain that AIPAC in the US will be sharpening its teeth as we speak in order to keep The Land Of The Free onside.

Subject: RE: BS: BDS of Israel 'Gathering Weight.'
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 09 Aug 14 - 01:23 PM

Gaza is under blockade only because it declared war on Israel and declared its intention to kill all Jews.
A blockade is the least response they could expect.

Why is Israel expected to be kind and forgiving to people trying and determined to kill them all?

Subject: RE: BS: BDS of Israel 'Gathering Weight.'
From: robomatic
Date: 09 Aug 14 - 02:46 PM

The overall effect of BDS is to isolate Israel, which only encourages extremists of both sides.
Israel is not South Africa under apartheid, despite arguments to the contrary.

Subject: RE: BS: BDS of Israel 'Gathering Weight.'
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 09 Aug 14 - 03:02 PM

Well, Keith (*sigh*), Hamas knows, I know, Israel knows, Jim knows, the whole world knows (except for you, of course), that Hamas will not get rid of Israel nor kill all the Jews. Israel wants Hamas to drop that alleged aim, and Hamas won't do it. Why not? Because that would be seen as a terrible defeat. Do you know something, Keith? Israel has made it so much harder for Hamas to renounce that aim. Israel's disproportionate actions have radicalised the Gazan people, not to speak of its other Arab neighbours, and (heaven forfend, but what a risk it was) might, in the words of Paddy Pantsdown, have created thousands more terrorists. So well done Bibi for making your people so much more secure, eh? Equally, Israel can't lift the blockade. Why not? Because that also would be seen as a terrible defeat. No other reason really. It's the politics of the infant school playground being played out by both sides. Both sides, Keith. Take your racist blinkers off just for a minute. But the side with the big bomb is the side who could take the initiative. But they won't. Why not? Well, they don't have to. No-one ever leans on them. They enjoy the (ever-thinning) security of military bankrolling for a start. Oh yes, world opinion might be turning against Israel, and rightly so, but all that will do is make AIPAC sharpen its teeth ever more.

By the way, ever seen a yank on here criticising AIPAC, just about the most undemocratic setup it's possible to conceive of?

Subject: RE: BS: BDS of Israel 'Gathering Weight.'
From: John on the Sunset Coast
Date: 09 Aug 14 - 03:20 PM

"... AIPAC, just about the most undemocratic setup it's possible to conceive of?"

What total bullshit! AIPAC is a legal lobbying organization in the United States. It has all the rights to expression of its wants and desires to Congress as, for instance, CAIR, NOW, unions, NAACP, the AMA, just to name a few. They are neither more nor less democratic than those organizations. You may not like that or the organization, but, then, I'm not surprised: AIPAC's aims don't agree with Mr. Shaw's.

Subject: RE: BS: BDS of Israel 'Gathering Weight.'
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 09 Aug 14 - 03:40 PM

"She knew nothing of any massacre until she went out in the aftermath."
For the sake of decency, if not self respect – stop lying
Jim Carroll
Ellen Seigal interview
That evening, a few other health-care workers and I climbed to one of the top floors of the hospital; it had been unused since the recent invasion. Because most of the walls had been bombed out, the view was unobstructed. We watched for a time as flares were shot into the air, brightly illuminating different parts of the camp. After each flare, rounds of light artillery fire were heard. I thought people were trying to shoot down the flares. Not a sound was heard from the camps except the noise of the flares being projected and the shots that followed. No screaming, no cries for help, no human sound, nothing. Israeli planes continued to fly overhead as the night went on.

Letter from Ellen Seigal
Following the assassination of the newly-elected president of Lebanon in mid-September all hell broke loose. I listened as Israeli planes broke the sound barrier over the camps, heard continuous heavy artillery fire, and stayed away from shattering windows. For almost 48 hours, from September 16th to the 18th, I attempted to save the lives of those who were brought to the hospital. Many had severe wounds from being shot at close range. I cared for hundreds of terrified refugees seeking the safety of the hospital. I tried to comprehend the throat-slitting gesture the women made. I watched from a top floor of the hospital as flares were shot in the air. The flares illuminated areas of the camp; the sound of automatic weapons fire followed each illumination.
Ellen Seigal letter
The first day of year 5743 was marked by the arrival of the Phalangists – you who were there remember that extremist militia – at the front of the hospital. They ordered the international health workers to assemble. They marched us down the main street of the camps: past dead bodies, past a bulldozer marked with a Hebrew letter which was shifting soil to cover over a large area where homes once stood. Many of the militia were using walkie-talkies. At one point, the soldiers lined us up against a bullet- ridden wall and pointed their rifles at us. After several minutes, they put their rifles down and marched us out of the camp.
Rita Couture Article of Ellen Seigal
Ellen Siegel was an American nurse from Baltimore who volunteered at Gaza hospital in Sabra camp. She was rounded up with 20 other foreign medical personal. Upon hearing the radio communications that the butchers inside the camp were ready to execute all of them, an army officer stopped the order and ran back to the camp to rescue Miss Siegel and another female nurse from Holland . The rest were lined up against the wall and executed. Miss Siegel was among 3 Americans who testified in the Kahane Commission, the Israeli official inquiry into the massacre.
Noam Chomski
NOAM CHOMSKY: Lebanese Christian terrorist force, allied with Israel. The soldiers watched as they illuminated it. They helped them enter. They watched for several days while they murdered, not 45 people, but somewhere—Israel claims 800, other analyses go up to several thousand. That's the Sabra-Shatila massacre. The idea that Sharon had indirect—the tsar, incidentally, was bitterly condemned internationally for direct responsibility. That's, in fact, one of the events that set off the huge flow of refugees from Eastern Europe, including my father, among others. But—so this was a kind of a replica, except far more brutal and vicious. And Sharon escaped more than a mild censure. It's true that he was removed as defense minister, but it wasn't long before he came back. And that's one of a number of extremely shocking incidents in his career.
Dr Swee Chai Ang
I worked in Gaza Hospital in Sabra Shatilla during the massacre trying to save the lives of a few dozen people, but outside the hospital hundreds were killed. My patients and I knew that Sharon and his officers were in control, and without them the massacre would not be possible. The residents of Sabra Shatilla could at least have escaped. Now more than 30 years later, we know that the killers were brought in by Israeli armoured cars and tanks, obeyed Israeli commands, their paths lit by Israeli military flares, and some of them also wore Israeli uniforms. The mutilated bodies of the victims were thrown into mass graves by Israeli bulldozers.
Robert Fisk
But in Beirut, the victims were Palestinians. The guilty were certainly Christian militiamen - from which particular unit we were still unsure - but the Israelis were also guilty. If the Israelis had not taken part in the killings, they had certainly sent militia into the camp. They had trained them, given them uniforms, handed them US army rations and Israeli medical equipment. Then they had watched the murderers in the camps, they had given them military assistance - the Israeli airforce had dropped all those flares to help the men who were murdering the inhabitants of Sabra and Chatila - and they had established military liason with the murderers in the camps

Subject: RE: BS: BDS of Israel 'Gathering Weight.'
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 09 Aug 14 - 04:34 PM

What total bullshit! AIPAC is a legal lobbying organization in the United States. It has all the rights to expression of its wants and desires to Congress as, for instance, CAIR, NOW, unions, NAACP, the AMA, just to name a few. They are neither more nor less democratic than those organizations. You may not like that or the organization, but, then, I'm not surprised: AIPAC's aims don't agree with Mr. Shaw's.

Hmm. Clearly a man signed up. :-) Now, Sunset John, I did not argue that AIPAC isn't legal. Booze and fags and fast cars are legal but they still do lots of damage. But, you see, what you are not telling us, in your staunch yet flawed defence of AIPAC, and what many yanks either deny (that'll be your media) or are scared to confront, is that AIPAC has Congress by the short and curlies. If a member of Congress briefs against Israel, AIPAC diverts lots of funding to their political enemies (and, if the miscreant was getting funding themselves, it's bye-bye to all that). This goes right to the top in American politics. President Obama knows that he cannot withdraw military aid from Israel, because, if he does, AIPAC will turn him into toast. Yet your electorate did not elect AIPAC. AIPAC consists of self-interested, wealthy and influential supporters of Israel, of all creeds and none (which is why you'll never catch me talking about "the Jewish lobby"). You live in a country that purports to lionise freedom and democracy. Yet you allow an unelected lobby group to dictate your foreign policy politics. If you think it stops at healthy and open lobbying, John, you are seriously deluded. But, again, that's your US media for you.

Subject: RE: BS: BDS of Israel 'Gathering Weight.'
From: John on the Sunset Coast
Date: 09 Aug 14 - 04:56 PM

You are right that AIPAC was not elected. BFD! It does no more nor no less than hundreds of lobbying groups. YOU don't like what it does, hence your antipathy towards it. You can couch your objections in any emotional way you wish, it is still the same garbage. If every single Jew in America joined AIPAC, and left the Democratic Party and President Obama (a wish devoutly longed for), it would be but a blip against them.

"AIPAC consists of self-interested, wealthy and influential supporters of Israel, of all creeds and none (which is why you'll never catch me talking about "the Jewish lobby")." But that is what you mean. NOW has male members, but it is a women's lobby group. Caucasians are members of the NAACP, but it is still a lobby group for 'Colored People". Don't be so mealy-mouthed, Steve..

Subject: RE: BS: BDS of Israel 'Gathering Weight.'
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 09 Aug 14 - 05:32 PM

Jim, you just posted a claim that some of her party were shot.
No account says that.

Seigel wrote your account 30 years after the event.
Compare with what she wrote at the time.


"That evening, a few other health-care workers and I climbed to one of the top floors of the hospital; it had been unused since the recent invasion. Because most of the walls had been bombed out, the view was unobstructed. We watched for a time as flares were shot into the air, brightly illuminating different parts of the camp. After each flare, rounds of light artillery fire were heard. I thought people were trying to shoot down the flares. Not a sound was heard from the camps except the noise of the flares being projected and the shots that followed. No screaming, no cries for help, no human sound, nothing. Israeli planes continued to fly overhead as the night went on."

No mention of automatic fire.
No sound in the camp.

Subject: RE: BS: BDS of Israel 'Gathering Weight.'
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 09 Aug 14 - 05:38 PM

Steve, why should we not believe what Hamas says?
Their actions tell the same story.
Why would anyone assume that they don't really mean it?
It is irrational.

Subject: RE: BS: BDS of Israel 'Gathering Weight.'
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 09 Aug 14 - 07:52 PM

You are right that AIPAC was not elected. BFD! It does no more nor no less than hundreds of lobbying groups. YOU don't like what it does, hence your antipathy towards it. You can couch your objections in any emotional way you wish, it is still the same garbage. If every single Jew in America joined AIPAC, and left the Democratic Party and President Obama (a wish devoutly longed for), it would be but a blip against them.

"AIPAC consists of self-interested, wealthy and influential supporters of Israel, of all creeds and none (which is why you'll never catch me talking about "the Jewish lobby")." But that is what you mean. NOW has male members, but it is a women's lobby group. Caucasians are members of the NAACP, but it is still a lobby group for 'Colored People". Don't be so mealy-mouthed, Steve..

What a strangely-unfocussed post. I don't have "antipathy" towards AIPAC. I am merely pointing out what they are and what they do. I note that you don't contradict that. I was more honest than most who might demur from AIPAC's stance in refraining from calling them "the Jewish lobby", remember? The irony of your remarks, clearly lost on you, is that you are getting all animated and emotional about my criticism of AIPAC whilst my comments are, as ever, icy-cool (I wouldn't bother posting here otherwise). I've been bold enough to state some home truths about AIPAC et al. but you regard that as "mealy-mouthed". What a strange person you are. And the more you post, the odder you sound. At least we know where your sympathies lie, and we now know how inchoate your notions are. Keep calm and carry on is my advice.

Subject: RE: BS: BDS of Israel 'Gathering Weight.'
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 09 Aug 14 - 07:55 PM

Steve, why should we not believe what Hamas says?

You don't believe Hamas when they say they don't use human shields, do you, Keith? Trouble is, you believe exactly what suits your prejudices. You have shown that time and time again.

Subject: RE: BS: BDS of Israel 'Gathering Weight.'
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 10 Aug 14 - 03:47 AM

"Jim, you just posted a claim that some of her party were shot."
Where?
You have claied that she was not aware that she was not aware of the massacre until she left the site even thought you know she witnessed it from the roof with the help of the flares being dropped by the Israelis and she and her collegues were traeting hundreds of victims for three days - a traffic accident maybe!
This gets ridiculous
Israel gave the Falange arms and uniforms - undisputed fact
They drove them to the camp and allowed them access to their victims - undisputed fact.
They stood by and allowed the massacre to take place for three days, fully aware of what was taking place - undisputed fact declared by many witnesses, including Israeli troops and dealt with by Israel's own Kahan Report.
Throughout the massacre, Israeli helicopters dropped flares, allowing it to go on day and night, so there can be no question of their not knowing what was taking place - undisputed fact.
After three days the Israelis transported the Falange from the site allowing them to escape any form of judicial proceedings for a massive crime which could and should have been punished in the International courts - undisputed fact.
They also provided bulldozers to level houses and dig mass graves to hide the evidence of those crimes and later built a sports stadium over them to ascertain that they would not be uncovered in the future - undisputed fact.
Both the independent inquiry into the massacre and the Kahan Commission report held Israel to be either directly or indirectly responsible for the massacre and held Ariel Sharon personally responsible - he was never brought to trial for this massive war crime - indisputable fact
You may nit-pick your way through these indisputable facts (on your own - "my job is done here", as you are fond of saying), but Israel has gone unpunished for a crime against humanity, and you are guilty of supporting its crime with your denials and evasions.
Feel free to continue
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: BDS of Israel 'Gathering Weight.'
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 10 Aug 14 - 07:18 AM

Have to admit I hadn't notice the reference to the shootings before; the quote came, as I say, from   - the full statement was written by a retired USAF veteran Mahmoud El-Yousseph - I'm quite sure his name prohibits his word been believed.   
Are we to assume that Helen Seigal is to be regarded as a liar, as you claimed all those lying soldiers who didn't believe they were dying for a glorious cause i World War One?
Jim Carroll

By Mahmoud El-Yousseph
September 14, 2008
Sabra and Shatilla are two Palestinian refugee camps in Beirut, Lebanon where over two thousand Palestinians were massacred during three days in September 1982 by hundreds of Lebanese Phalange and Haddad militiamen with the aid and support of the Israeli Defense Forces.
During the 1982 Israeli invasion into Lebanon and siege of Beirut , U.S. Envoy Phillip Habib managed to have a written agreement whereby Palestinian fighters would leave Lebanon , providing a U.S. guarantee to the safety of Palestinian refugees left behind in the camps.
After Palestinian fighters evacuated Lebanon , the Israeli army sealed off Sabra and Shatilla refugee camps and established a command post at the Kuwaiti embassy, a seven-story building over looking both camps.
Present at the command post were the primary architects of the atrocity: Israeli Defense Minister Ariel Sharon and Chief of Lebanese Forces Intelligence Elie Hobeika, along with high-ranking Israeli army officials.
In the early morning of September 16th, the Israeli army allowed bloodthirsty armed militiamen to enter the camps, provided with weapons, bulldozers, and communication equipment. They were also given hashish and heroin to help them maintain "courage." For 48 hours, the militia participated in wholesale slaughter and rape. Women and children were not spared. The Israeli army lit the skies over the camps by firing flares during the nights, and also prevented residents of the camp from escaping . A group of refugees who reached the one of the Israeli checkpoint were ordered by soldiers to return back into the camp – even though they told soldiers that people are being slaughtered inside. This encounter was documented by a Scandinavian news crew.
Ellen Siegel was an American nurse from Baltimore who volunteered at Gaza hospital in Sabra camp. She was rounded up with 20 other foreign medical personal. Upon hearing the radio communications that the butchers inside the camp were ready to execute all of them, an army officer stopped the order and ran back to the camp to rescue Miss Siegel and another female nurse from Holland . The rest were lined up against the wall and executed. Miss Siegel was among 3 Americans who testified in the Kahane Commission, the Israeli official inquiry into the massacre.
No adjectives exist to describe this heinous atrocity. This crime was beyond all human and moral comprehension. However, an American journalist and researcher, Janet Stevens was among the first people to visit both camps the day after this ugly crime. She wrote the following testimony to her American friend Franklin Lamb:
"I saw dead women in their houses with their skirts up to their waists
and their legs spread apart; dozens of young men shot after being
lined up against an alley wall; children with their throats slit, a
pregnant woman with her stomach chopped open, her eyes still wide
open, her blackened face silently screaming in horror; countless
babies and toddlers who had been stabbed or ripped apart and who had
been thrown into garbage piles."

As the news and images of the massacre were broadcast worldwide, shockwaves, anger, and resentment were felt everywhere. I do remember exactly having the same feeling during the 9/11 terrorist attacks. In fact there were a lot similarities: The number of casualties almost the same, in both cases the victims were innocent civilians, and the perpetrators of both crimes were ruthless and did not value human life.

In Israel , 400,000 protesters took part in a peace rally in Tel Aviv demanding the resignation of Ariel Sharon and demanded he should be tried for war crimes.

An Israeli commentator denounced Sharon 's complicity into the massacre in a commentary which said in part, "…you can't toss a snake into a cradle, then act surprise when the baby gets bitten."

Meanwhile the Kahane Commission in Israel turned out to be a "kangaroo court" where the outcome was essentially predetermined, and the process was compromised. Several high-ranking military officers were found negligent, got a slap on the hand and later promoted. Sharon was forced to resign as the defense minister, and was barred for life from holding public office. Despite all of this, Israelis elected him in 2001 as their prime minister. In 2005, President Bush called this certified war criminal as "a man of peace". "The butcher of Beirut" would have been more accurate title to describe Ariel Sharon.

Eluding Justice: What happened to the victims and those responsible for the massacre 25 years later is mind-boggling.

* On June 18, 2001, several victims and other relatives sued Ariel Sharon for war crimes in a Belgium Court .
But under pressure from U.S. and Israeli governments, Belgium dropped the case as inadmissible. According to Franklin Lamb, Belgium scrapped the case after US Secretary of Defense then, Donald Rumsfeld, told Belgium: "It is your goddamned Sharon Trail or NATO Headquarter, you choose!"

* All militiamen who took part in the killing received amnesty from the Lebanese
government.

* Elie Hobeika was killed in a car bomb in Beirut 20 years after the massacre. His killing took place days after he gave an interview threatening to turn more damning evidence against Ariel Sharon in the Belgium Court.

* Two of Hobeika's top lieutenants were assassinated in a separate incidents

*Ariel Sharon suffered massive stroke in 2006 that ended his political career. Later, Israel 's cabinet declared Sharon officially "permanently incapacitated" until this day.

Finally, remember the 3 Americans who testified in the Kahane Commission?

Janet Stevens was killed during the 1983 bombing of the US Embassy in Beirut . She was pregnant with her first child, a baby boy. Mrs. Stevens went into the Embassy to seek more aid for the Lebanese people in the south and Palestinians in Beirut who were affected by the Israeli invasion and by the massacre. Mrs. Stevens' best friend, Franklin Lamb is a prominent researcher and author, frequently writing about the Middle East . Their work and sacrifices for human rights represent America 's pretty face.

Ellen Siegel continues to write letters, make calls, and write op ed. pieces to bring justice for the victims of the Sabra and Shatilla massacres and to promote genuine peace between Palestinians and Israelis. I had the privilege of meeting her in 1985 in a Washington , D.C. hotel lobby.. She has returned to Lebanon several times. She is currently in Lebanon for the 26th anniversary of the massacre to stand in solidarity with the Palestinians. To honor the and pay tribute the victims and their loved ones, she will be placing roses on the soil of the mass grave of the victims, and intend to silently recite Kaddish, the Hebrew prayer for the dead.

Mahmoud El-Yousseph
USAF Retired Veteran

Subject: RE: BS: BDS of Israel 'Gathering Weight.'
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 10 Aug 14 - 07:47 AM

Steve, it is a fact that they fight from civilian areas so that retaliation kills civilians, so they use human shields.

Jim, she describes battle around the area of the hospital and treating the wounded.
In her original account she says there was no sound in the camp under the flares.
In either account, nothing she says contradicts Israel's version of events.

"Miss Siegel and another female nurse from Holland . The rest were lined up against the wall and executed. Miss Siegel was among 3 Americans who testified in the Kahane Commission, the Israeli official inquiry into the massacre.
Noam Chomski"

That was not rue according to both accounts.

Subject: RE: BS: BDS of Israel 'Gathering Weight.'
From: bobad
Date: 10 Aug 14 - 07:51 AM

Noam Chomski [sic}

The well known apologist of Pol Pot and the Khmer Rouge....very reliable.

Subject: RE: BS: BDS of Israel 'Gathering Weight.'
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 10 Aug 14 - 08:33 AM

NOAM CHOMSKI
"That was not rue according to both accounts."
Maybe - maybe not - but so what?
Please stop nit-picking to avoid the undeniable - and mainly undenied facts that have been put up
Both Doctor Goebbels and David Irving would have been ashamed of your cack-handed efforts - you'll never make the big-league if you go on the way you are.
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: BDS of Israel 'Gathering Weight.'
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 10 Aug 14 - 05:50 PM

Steve, it is a fact that they fight from civilian areas so that retaliation kills civilians, so they use human shields.

Fact my arse. Keith, this is received unwisdom from Islamophobic sources, unprovable by you or by any of your fellow-traveller racists. Churning it out machine-like by knee-jerk does not make it true. Do look at a bloody map. Gaza is a titchy-tiny territory (you could walk across it in an hour and a half) containing nearly two million people. It is one of the most crowded places on earth. Turn the bloody record over. They say the first casualty of war is truth. A big part of that casualty is the automatic and tedious claim, used in every modern conflict, especially against Muslims (easy meat, eh, Keith?), that your enemy is using human shields. Do have a think, and do grow up. You're bloody old enough.

Subject: RE: BS: BDS of Israel 'Gathering Weight.'
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 10 Aug 14 - 05:59 PM

Noam Chomski [sic}

The well known[sic] apologist of [sic] Pol Pot and the Khmer Rouge

Really? Give us your evidence for this, or else just shut your slanderous gob, gobshite minnow. And I won't be holding my breath.

Subject: RE: BS: BDS of Israel 'Gathering Weight.'
From: John on the Sunset Coast
Date: 10 Aug 14 - 08:36 PM

"I don't have "antipathy" towards AIPAC." Steve Shaw
Really!?

Hows this for non-antipathy? "...AIPAC, just about the most undemocratic setup it's possible to conceive of?" Or this, "AIPAC has Congress by the short and curlies. If a member of Congress briefs against Israel, AIPAC diverts lots of funding to their political enemies (and, if the miscreant was getting funding themselves, it's bye-bye to all that)." Or this, "...AIPAC will turn him [Pres. Obama] into toast." I would hate to read anything you wrote about AIPAC if you REALLY disliked it based on the slew of pejorative's you've used to describe that lobby. How self-delusional can you be?

I repeat, AIPAC does nothing different from any other lobbying group. Teachers unions actively work against candidates they deem anti-teacher, funding and working for their opponents; NOW advocates for a whole host of women's issues and funds those candidates who agree with them to the detriment of those who seem not to; and on and on to every group one can think of, no matter what their particular agenda. I repeat, your antipathy (hatred, repugnance, loathing, or you choose an apt descriptor) is because you, Steve Shaw, don't like what AIPAC stands for.

You may think you're so 'ice cool' for not using the "J" word,but you're really being dishonest by not. AIPAC supports Israel as a Jewish state; even the non-Jewish members of the group do. You are really weaseling a distinction without a difference. What I had meant to write yesterday in response your supposed non-use of 'Jewish Lobby' was to this effect: You would never write, "(I did not say National Organization for Women because men belong to that group.)" That would be an absurd aside. What you did write is equally so.

To summarize. AIPAC is a lobbying group to elicit support for the Jewish State of Israel, and vice versa. They give lots of money to those who agree with them, and withhold contributions from those who don't. No one has ever denied that. This is not news. This IS what lobbyists and PACs do—both sides. Get over it.

Subject: RE: BS: BDS of Israel 'Gathering Weight.'
From: MGM·Lion
Date: 11 Aug 14 - 01:25 AM

Oh, yes: ever so "ice-cool". Here follow just a couple of extracts from Mr Ice-Cool's more recent posts. (Instances could no doubt be multiplied to ∞ if one could just trouble to go back a bit further):-

"just shut your slanderous gob, gobshite minnow...

Turn the bloody record over. .. grow up. You're bloody old enough".

& those from the one who recently assured us "my comments are, as ever, icy-cool (I wouldn't bother posting here otherwise".

So why bother at all, then? Or is Mr Ice-Cool on holiday for a bit, & Mr Scream'n'Shout standing in for him?

Just try a bit of the old Socratic "Know Thyself", why dontcha, Steve, & stop being so inenarrably conceited & pompous!

Best regards as ever

≈M≈

Subject: RE: BS: BDS of Israel 'Gathering Weight.'
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 11 Aug 14 - 04:38 AM

Jim, "That was not rue according to both accounts."
Maybe - maybe not - but so what?"

An example of the lying that goes on against Israel.

Steve, it is legal to fire from civilian areas as we have all seen Hamas doing but you must evacuate civilians from the danger area.
Hamas does not and that is the "human shield" war crime.

Subject: RE: BS: BDS of Israel 'Gathering Weight.'
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 11 Aug 14 - 05:07 AM

"An example of the lying that goes on against Israel."
According to you - every criticism of Israel is "lies"
I have yet to see you accept any condemnation of Israel.
There are many dozens of eyewitness accounts of Israelis actually being on site and observing the massacre close at hand, accounts of women appealing to Israeli soldiers when they were being dragged away to be mob-raped before having their throats cut.
All these are to be had in plenty - unfortunately they are all by survivors, so it would be a waste of time putting them up.
Israel calling, Israel calling
Address the points made and stop prevaricating
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: BDS of Israel 'Gathering Weight.'
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 11 Aug 14 - 08:29 AM

There are many dozens of eyewitness accounts of Israelis actually being on site and observing the massacre close at hand

Yes there are.
There are also eye witness accounts (by nurses) of Israelis throwing dozens of bodies off the MV Marmara, but it was lies.
There are also eye witness accounts of the Jenin massacre, and that was all lies.
Enemies of Israel lie against Israel.
Do not be so gullible and naive.

You chose to mention the "Jewish American nurse."
Her account does not support any of those claims, and nor does Robert Fisk's first report.

Subject: RE: BS: BDS of Israel 'Gathering Weight.'
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 11 Aug 14 - 08:50 AM

Guardian, 3 days ago.

It is no longer possible to deny that Europe still has a "Jewish problem". In France, synagogues have been firebombed. In Germany, chants of "Hamas, Hamas, Jews to the gas!" have been heard. The British Jewish community, too, is reporting a spike in antisemitic incidents – most thankfully non-violent – in a nasty spillover of anger over Gaza. "Free Gaza" was spray-painted onto a Brighton synagogue; a "child murderers" sign affixed to a synagogue in Surrey. This nastiness permeates polite society too: in sympathising with David Ward MP's pro-Hamas comments, former Lib Dem MEP Edward McMillan-Scott derided the Board of Deputies of British Jews as "a frightful bag of disputatious Jews".

Perhaps no wonder that Newsweek's cover story last week had the chilling headline: "Exodus: why Europe's Jews are fleeing once again".

Critics of Israeli policy might say that only Zionists, not all Jews, should be facing reproach for the operation in Gaza. But the anti-Jewish backlash – aimed at Jewish, not specifically Zionist, targets – has, ironically, reminded many Jews precisely why they need a safe and secure Jewish homeland in the first place – the essence of Zionism.

Why has the conflict in Gaza caused such a frightening reaction on the streets of Europe? One answer is that the media attention has been excessive, exaggerated beyond all reasonable proportions, and it is this which encourages outbursts of anger by appealing to the public's emotions. Tiny Israel ranks fifth in the list of foreign countries most reported on by the Guardian. Gaza is an important news story – but the wall-to-wall coverage leaves many scratching their heads. Nobody seems to recall similar attention devoted to the far greater civilian casualties of the UK's operations in Iraq and Afghanistan.

Why the disproportionate coverage of Israel? "Jews are news" many say, with a shrug. But this obsession with Israel's conduct tacitly encourages the easy slide into hostility towards Jews.

First, the reporting gives the false impression that the situation in Gaza, though tragic, is uniquely horrific. Compare it to the silence surrounding Isis's frightening rampage through Iraq: Mosul has been emptied of its ancient Christian community; hundreds of thousands of Yezidis have been cleansed from Nineveh province. Compare it also to coverage of the plight of Palestinians in Syria, where thousands of Palestinians have been killed and the Yarmouk refugee camp remains under siege. How many newspaper front pages have been devoted to these events?

The problem is not helped by hyperbole: one report on Sky News even compared the Gaza operation to the nuclear attacks on Hiroshima and Nagasaki. Moreover, the flood of heartbreaking images of dead children addles the brain: Israel's protestations that it does more than any other army to avoid civilian casualties are simply laughed off. Israel is painted as irredeemably evil; its friends, accomplices in crime. I cannot count the number of times I have been told that if I am a Zionist – which means no more than believing that Israel has a right to exist – that means I must support the murder of children.

Second, much of the media have failed to seriously engage with Israel's moral and strategic dilemmas, assuming instead that Israel deliberately seeks civilian casualties.
http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2014/aug/07/gaza-coverage-rise-antisemitic-attacks-europe

Subject: RE: BS: BDS of Israel 'Gathering Weight.'
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 11 Aug 14 - 04:14 PM

We are especially horrified by what Israel does because we in the west unconditionally prop Israel up. We do not prop up many "Islamic" regimes, Keith. It all gives some of us a bit of a conscience. Let me just ask you why President Obama has been so quick to deploy his air strikes against ISIS (a strategy which, reluctantly, I support), yet has scarcely a word to say about the slaughter of innocent civilians in Gaza. Nothing to do with the pro-Israel lobby, I suppose? Your argument turned on its head, innit, Keith?

Subject: RE: BS: BDS of Israel 'Gathering Weight.'
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 11 Aug 14 - 04:51 PM

"just shut your slanderous gob, gobshite minnow...

Yes, well, Michael very old boy, the man (or woman - how would I know..) who calls himself or herself "bobad" is indeed an intellectual minnow. It is rare to see anyone here, even among you rabid Islamophobes, supporting this person. It's crystal clear that he or she is an infernal embarrassment to you all, what with his or her lack of development of argument and non-stop copy-and-pasting. And slanderous? Calling those who justifiably criticise (carefully) the actions of the state of Israel "Jew-haters"? Glad you can see your way to supporting that, Michael, though, in view of your recent posting history, I'm hardly surprised. Do carry on disingenuously trying to make me "civil", old fruit, but, if you don't mind, I will judge you by who you're in bed with, not by your faux-elegant turn of phrase. Nighty night. Don't let those nasty Muslims bite.

Subject: RE: BS: BDS of Israel 'Gathering Weight.'
From: Greg F.
Date: 11 Aug 14 - 05:33 PM

lack of development of argument and non-stop copy-and-pasting.....Calling those who justifiably criticise (carefully) the actions of the state of Israel "Jew-haters"

Now that's not at all fair, Steve, singling out BooBad - you're neglecting BullshotBruce!

Subject: RE: BS: BDS of Israel 'Gathering Weight.'
From: Greg F.
Date: 11 Aug 14 - 05:36 PM

the Jewish State of Israel

Hmmmm----- if it walks like a theocracy and calls itself a theocracy......

Subject: RE: BS: BDS of Israel 'Gathering Weight.'
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 11 Aug 14 - 06:06 PM

Yes, it is interesting that the state of Israel has gone to great lengths (no exaggeration - no antisemitism!) to proudly characterise itself as a Jewish state (in spite of the fact that two million Arabs live in it, a lot more if you count the ones Israel holds prisoner in Gaza). So let's see. Those of us who criticise the state of Israel for its actions against the Gazan people are, no doubt, criticising a "Jewish state". Well I can't help that. The "Jewish state" wasn't my idea. Calling yourself a "Jewish state" does not immunise you against criticism for the most foul behaviour on the grounds that your critics are "antisemitic." Nice try, but bugger off!

Subject: RE: BS: BDS of Israel 'Gathering Weight.'
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 11 Aug 14 - 06:24 PM

Hows this for non-antipathy? "...AIPAC, just about the most undemocratic setup it's possible to conceive of?" Or this, "AIPAC has Congress by the short and curlies. If a member of Congress briefs against Israel, AIPAC diverts lots of funding to their political enemies (and, if the miscreant was getting funding themselves, it's bye-bye to all that)." Or this, "...AIPAC will turn him [Pres. Obama] into toast." I would hate to read anything you wrote about AIPAC if you REALLY disliked it based on the slew of pejorative's you've used to describe that lobby. How self-delusional can you be?

Every statement I made about AIPAC, everything you're getting all animated about, is a statement of fact. Actually, you don't appear to deny any of it. Good for you. But...

I repeat, AIPAC does nothing different from any other lobbying group.

Ah, the innocence of the naive! AIPAC is actually in control of Congress apropos of policy regarding Israel. I love lobby groups. We need them. But AIPAC makes sure that no politician in your Land Of The Free can ever raise a finger against Israel. Yes that is not illegal, but yes that is a damn sight more than is entailed by healthy and robust lobbying. AIPAC has crossed the line from healthy lobbying to sinister and undemocratic control by the wealthy and influential unelected. Of course, John, you can't see this, because you're a big supporter (member?) of AIPAC and a big supporter of Israel, and you don't get the full story from your benighted media. You are AIPAC's fodder. Good luck to you and AIPAC! :-)

Subject: RE: BS: BDS of Israel 'Gathering Weight.'
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 11 Aug 14 - 06:26 PM

Now that's not at all fair, Steve, singling out BooBad - you're neglecting BullshotBruce!

Let me assure you, Greg, that if any man on this planet is worth neglecting, it's him.

Subject: RE: BS: BDS of Israel 'Gathering Weight.'
From: Greg F.
Date: 11 Aug 14 - 06:46 PM

Can't argue with that, Steve - can't argue with that.

Subject: RE: BS: BDS of Israel 'Gathering Weight.'
From: MGM·Lion
Date: 12 Aug 14 - 01:12 AM

"I will judge you by who you're in bed with"
.,.,.

Don't care how you 'judge' me in the slightest, my dear young Steve; insofar, that is, as you may arrogate to yourself any 'judging' rights whatsoever. And I am not trying to make you 'civil': you just carry on being as rude as you like ~~ you merely, as Dr Leavis used to put it, 'place yourself'. It's the entertaining anomaly of your image of yourself as 'ice-cool'*, in conjunction with your perpetual 'gobshites' & 'bugger offs' [another of those just a couple of your posts back] to which I draw attention, in hopes that other readers of this thread may find it as exceptionally amusing as I do.. Is 'ice-cool' really your image of yourself, you foolish young fellow?

Regards again from the oh-so-helplessly-ancient

≈M≈

*"my comments are, as ever, icy-cool (I wouldn't bother posting here otherwise" --- well, hohoho and a parcel of bum!

Subject: RE: BS: BDS of Israel 'Gathering Weight.'
From: MGM·Lion
Date: 12 Aug 14 - 01:24 AM

In which connection, BTW, I would not disagree with the principle contained in your comment

'Calling yourself a "Jewish state" does not immunise you against criticism for the most foul behaviour on the grounds that your critics are "antisemitic." Nice try, but bugger off!'

--- but would add for your consideration that it does not by any means totally exclude the possibility that some antisemitism, on the part of some who deploy such 'criticisms', may be at least a part of their motivation, for all that.

Does it?

Subject: RE: BS: BDS of Israel 'Gathering Weight.'
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 12 Aug 14 - 03:10 AM

"Does it?"
No it doesn't Mike, but unless you can point out such Antisemitism other than criticism of Israeli policy you have no evidence that any exists.
Israel supporters have erected a fence to defend her war crimes - "you're only arresting me because I'm black officer".
It isn't even original, let alone justified.
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: BDS of Israel 'Gathering Weight.'
From: MGM·Lion
Date: 12 Aug 14 - 04:11 AM

Entirely take your point, Jim. You know well my views on the matter, and the fact that you sometimes denounce them as 'lip-service' doesn't actually affect them at all. But you seemed in your last post to be asking me to demonstrate a negative, which notoriously can't be done in most cases.

≈M≈